The Herreshoff Brothers and their Torpedo Boats, Part XI

[1] Quotes from “Report of the Secretary of The Navy, William C. Whitney Dec. 1, 1886.” P.16. & “App. No. 3 Report of the Admiral of The Navy, David Dixon Porter. November 15, 1886.” P. 57. Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy with Accompanying Documents for the Year 1886. Washington GPO 1886.

This is the story of Herreshoff’s unsuccessful bid to build the US Navy's first 30-knot torpedo boat.

[5] John R. Spears, The History of our Navy; from its origins to the End of the War with Spain (1775 – 1898); Vol V War with Spain, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York 1902. Pg. 90. Also "Report of the Secretary of the Navy Dec. 6, 1887, William C. Whitney", Pgs. iii-iv.

[6] "The Building of Warships; Annual Report of Secretary Whitney; The Poor Results Attained by the New Cruisers (i.e., the ABC cruisers)- Broad Plans for Making the Navy Stronger", New York Times, Dec. 4, 1886.

[7] Sir Edward J. Reed, M.P. (late Chief Constructor of the British Navy) & Edward Simpson RADM USN (Late President US Naval Advisory Board), Modern Ships of War. (Harper & Brothers, New York, 1888) Pgs. 167-8. Provides specifics on John Roach actions to provide domestic steel plating for the ABCD ships.

[8] The purchase of quality domestic steel would remain a major problem for about 15 more years. Paul E. Pedisich, Congress Buys a Navy, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis MD. 2016. Pg. 62.

In October 1896 the Secretary of the Navy directs the award of the US Navy’s first two 30-knot torpedo boats to the Bath Iron Works (BIW) rather than purchasing at least one of the more capable vessels offered by the Herreshoff Manufacturing Co. (HMCo). He takes this action even though Congressional funding for the program is obtained largely through the vigorous outreach of John Brown Herreshoff, and is contrary to the recommendations of torpedo warfare experts at the Bureau of Ordnance (BuOrd).

[8] The purchase of quality domestic steel would remain a major problem for about 15 more years. Paul E. Pedisich, Congress Buys a Navy, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis MD. 2016. Pg. 62.

[1] NGH “Estimate of Machinery for Torpedo Vessel of Adl Porter Design,” Naval Architecture & Eng’g. Notes; Book 2 of 5. Spring of 1884. Two pages. On page 2 Capt. Nat provides two engine designs A & B. He notes (in Nov. 1886) that B was adopted, but never finished. Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection, Herreshoff Marine Museum.

[2] “Report of the Admiral of the Navy to the Secretary of the Navy 1886”, Washington, GPO 1886. Inscribed, “Mr. Herreshoff compliments of the Admiral”. Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection, Herreshoff Marine Museum.

[3] David Dixon Porter archival collections include " avid D. Porter Papers, (1806-1890)" at Syracuse University. "David Porter Papers" Clements Library, Univ of Michigan, including a 200 page long ""My Career in the Navy Department". "David D. Porter Family Papers", Library of Congress.

1896 – The State of Affairs

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

By early 1896 all the pieces are in place for HMCo to design and build torpedo boats (TBs) 6 & 7 free from Navy Bureaus’ oversight, and in the brothers’ view, perceived interference. A special business relationship has been forged with Secretary of the Navy Hillary Herbert. The Herreshoff brothers guarantee to deliver two torpedo boats meeting the Secretary’s desire for 27 knots, and he in return guarantees them freedom of action.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[4] All quotes are from "Report of the Admiral of the Navy to the Secretary of the Navy 1886", Appendix 3 to Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy with Accompanying Documents for the Year 1886. Washington GPO 1886. Pages 54-69.

On March 23^rd the House of Representatives Committee on Naval Affairs completes action on the Naval Appropriation bill for the new year and forwards it to the Senate for action. It includes the first quantity buy of torpedo boats; $875,000 for five large torpedo boats ($175,000 each) to have a speed of at least 26 knots and ten smaller boats to have the highest speed possible. There are set asides for one boat to be built on the Pacific coast, one on the Gulf, and one on the Mississippi River; provided cost is not excessive.[1] In this news John Brown Herreshoff sees his opportunity to solidify the special relationship with Secretary Herbert. Herreshoff will offer to build the larger boats, with a guaranteed speed of at least 30 knots- matching the best in England and France.[2]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[1] “New Vessels for the Navy: The Section of the Appropriation Bill Regarding Them”, The New York Times, Tuesday March 24, 1896. Pg 3. The article specifies 25 knots for the five larger TBS, but letters between Converse & the Secretary of the Navy staff assistant Buckingham make clear 26 knots is the correct speed.

[2] Contemporary news reports from France and England were highlighting achievement of 30 knots. On Dec. 21, 1895, the French, Normand built torpedo boat FORBAN made 31-1/4 knots on builder’s trials and later easily made 30 knots in naval trials. On six measured mile runs, the British, Thornycroft built torpedo boat destroyer DESPERATE achieved 30.46 knots. (Sources; “The new fast French torpedo boat FORBAN”, US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette, Vol. 33 Dec. 28, 1895. Pg 314. “Various Naval Items”, US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette, Vol. 33 April 11, 1896, Pg. 580.)

John Brown Herreshoff's Offer & Response^[3]

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

[3] Primary source are the letters of Benjamin Buckingham, staff Assistant to the Secretary of the Navy, Hillary Herbert, written to CDR George Converse, then OIC Torpedo Station Newport and assigned additional duty as the “General Inspector” of the torpedo boats building at HMCo. The letters are part of the George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ. The complete collection is available online. However, one important piece is missing from the collection- there are no copies of the Converse letters to Buckingham. Fortunately, Buckingham’s letters are comprehensive, so we are able to deduce the actions and positions of the parties.

Figure 2: John Brown Herreshoff age 54 in 1895, onboard EUGENIA to witness the DEFENDER- VALKYRIE II America’s Cup races.

(Source; Herreshoff family photo. HMM scan files _900)

Figure 3: Nathanael G. Herreshoff age 47 in 1895 at HMCo pier.

(Source Stebbins photo. HMM scan files _287)

On March 27, 1896, John visits Secretary Herbert in Wash. DC and offers to guarantee not less than 30 knots if given an order to build two or more somewhat larger TBs (not more than 225 ton) for $215,000 each. He proposes to use nickel steel to save weight and gain strength- but at a cost. Herbert “induces” John to put the offer in writing, which he does, dictating a handwritten letter to the Secretary, (Figure 4).[4]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[4] “Benjamin Buckingham letter to George Converse, March 27, 1896” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 3. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ. Buckingham describes the meeting between John and the Secretary, provides a copy of John's letter of March 27 (see Figure 4) & relates the actions Secretary Herbert takes with the letter.

Copy Confidential

Herreshoff Manufacturing Company

Bristol, RI

March 27, 1896

Sir,

Referring to the Naval Appropriations Bill as it passed the House yesterday, we notice a provision for the construction of five torpedo boats to have a maximum speed of not less than 26 knots and to cost in all not exceeding $875,000.

We would like to build for our Navy 2 or more boats of this type, somewhat larger than those contemplated by this bill, but not to exceed 225 tons displacement, with a maximum speed of not less than 30 kts.

To enable us to realize this speed on this displacement, it would be important to use the highest quality of material obtainable, and to employ the greatest care and skill in manufacture. We are confident however that by using a nickel steel that has been lately developed in this country we will be able to save sufficiently in weight and gain in strength to obtain the result, but that can only be done by considerably increasing the cost of material and labor, over that necessary for the torpedo boats hitherto built in this country. We would be willing however to build two or more such vessels, guaranteeing a maximum speed of at least 30 kts. per hour for the sum of $215,000 each. Such vessels, in our opinion, would favorably compare with the best or fastest of any foreign torpedo boat or torpedo catcher that have yet been tried.

We are very anxious to have our Navy in possession of the fastest vessels of this type in the world, and feel sure that for the amount named we would be able to produce boats with a maximum speed of 30 kts. and would be willing to contract for 2 or more of them under any guarantees the Dept. would see fit to make to insure fulfillment of the contract.

Very Respectfully,

Herreshoff Mfg. Co. John B. Herreshoff Pres. (Signed)

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

Figure 4: JBH to the Secretary March 27, 1896 (handwritten transcribed)[5]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[5] “JBH letter March 27, 1896” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 3. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

If John expects the Secretary to immediately enter into a special arrangement similar to TBs 6 & 7, he is to be disappointed. We do not know what the Secretary told John, but based upon his actions we can assume he stated he was going to request the authority and funds for three 30-knot TBs. Secretary Hebert immediately forwards JBH’s letter to the Senate Committee on Naval Affairs requesting the large TB appropriation be increased $120,000 (from $875,000 to $995,000) to allow the building of three large 30 knot TBs as proposed by Herreshoff for $215,000 per boat vs $175,000 in the House bill.[6] Following the meeting there is uncertainty in the Secretary’s office whether the Herreshoff $215,000 price includes the funds for the government furnished armament, estimated at $25,000 per boat.[7]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[6] “Benjamin Buckingham letter to George Converse, March 27, 1896”, George Albert Converse Papers ,Box 1, Folder 3. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

[7] “Benjamin Buckingham letter to George Converse, March 30, 1896” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 3. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.This letter discusses funding and pricing issues and whether Herreshoff understands that the vessel appropriations include $ to cover both the TB builder & Government furnished armament. It is not just for the builder.

Through April and May, the US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette carefully tracks and reports the negotiations between the Navy and congressional committees over the number of TBs, and their capabilities.[8] Buckingham’s correspondence keeps Converse informed. He and the Herreshoff brothers must be encouraged by the Secretary Herbert’s obvious support evidenced in those letters. In early April Buckingham writes he believes the Secretary will give Herreshoff the chance to build at least three of the 30-knot big boats and possibly several of the others. By mid-April the current version of the Appropriations bill limits a builder to three boats. Whatever the number, Buckingham advises, the Secretary wants Herreshoff to build as much as the law allows and he cautions the Secretary wants Herreshoff ready to enter a contract as soon as the law passes.[9]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[8] See US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette, Vol. 33, April 11, 1896, Pg. 580; May 9, 1896, Pg. 656; July 4, 1896, Pg. 802.

[9] “Benjamin Buckingham letter to George Converse, April 4, 1896” & “Benjamin Buckingham letter to George Converse, April 16, 1896.” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 3. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

The Navy Appropriation Bill passed on June 10, 1896 provides for “three torpedo boats, to have a maximum speed of not less than 30 knots for one hour, to cost in all not exceeding $800,000, and not to exceed ten torpedo boats to cost in all not exceeding $500,000, and to have the highest practicable speed for vessels of their class…not more than three torpedo boats shall built in one yard … the contract shall be awarded by the Secretary of the Navy to the lowest best responsible bidder…and all parts the vessels shall be of domestic materials and manufacture… with contract award no later than October 8, 1896.”[10]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[10] Extracted from “The New Torpedo Boats” ANJ, July 4, 1896, Pg. 802.

Secretary Herbert wants to have the shipbuilders responsible for the plans and details of the boats. He directs Chief Naval Constructor Hichborn (Chief BuC&R) to prepare only a general Circular of Requirements for the contracts.[11] In compliance, Hichborn issues in early June the Circular (Summarized in Attachment A) defining the chief characteristics of three torpedo boat designs. A change to the Circular is issued on June 24^th, specifying the times allowed for construction.[12]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[11] ANJ May 9, 1896, Pg. 64.

[12] Philip Hitchborn, Chief Constructor USN, Chief Bu C&R. “Bu C&R No. 1540/96 & E.2.” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 8. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ. Note- documents contain two spellings for the Chief Constructor: Hichborn & Hitchborn.

● 30-knot TB built to contractor plans and specifications with very few Navy directed requirements. Time allowed for construction 18 months.

● 20-knot TB of about 105 ft. length, 68 tons displacement built to either Navy plans and specifications or contractor plans and specifications. Time allowed for construction one year.

● 22-1/2 knot TB of about 140 ft length, 105 tons displacement built to contractor plans and specifications. Time allowed for construction one year.

[2] William duBarry Thomas. “The Genesis of a Professional Society”. SNAME Transactions. Vol.101, 1993, pgs.31-9.

The Navy releases the advertisement for the 13 TB procurement, including the Circular on June 18 with the bids to be opened on Sept. 18, 1896. John stays close to the Secretary, visiting on June 29th to advise HMCo will bid “on some of these vessels particularly the three high speed boats”[13] and Herbert visits HMCo on August 7^th, just prior to departing for an extended tour of English and French ordnance factories and shipyards.[14]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[13] “Will Bid on the Torpedo Boats” New York Times, Wash. DC June 30, 1896

[14] NGH Diary Aug. 7, 1896, Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection. Herreshoff Marine Museum.

Competition for the Three 30-Knot Torpedo Boats

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

Figure 5A: 30-Knot TBs General Characteristics ^{[i] [ii] [iii]}

[i] Technical data for TBs 9, 10 & 11 are as designed and proposed at time of 30-knot torpedo boat contract award Oct. 8, 1896, and displayed in Table No. 1 “Torpedo Boats of the US Navy”, W. G. Gillmor Asst. Naval Constructor, “Torpedo Boat Design”, Transactions Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Vol. V, 1897. Pgs. 51-79.

[ii] HMCo 30-knot technical data for the Sept. 18, 1896 bid taken from (1) HMCo document “Specifications for the Construction of Three Thirty-Knot Torpedo Boats. Torpedo Boats Nos. 9, 10 & 11” Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection Herreshoff Marine Museum Item MRDW02_06090. Folder [no #]. Undated. Document marked on first page with US Navy Judge Advocate General stamp “4329 1896” documenting formal submittal to the US Navy. And (2) HMCo documents “Specifications twin-screw Torpedo Boat US Navy” Marked in pencil #13. 18 pages. “Specifications 30-knot Torpedo Boat”, 11 pages. George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 10. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

[iii] Pricing taken from “30-Knot Torpedo Boats Nos 9, 10 & 11” Journal American Society of Naval Engineers, Vol. 8, 1896 Pgs. 800-801. Pricing data also in “Torpedo Boats for the US Navy” Army Navy Journal Vol 34. Sept. 26, 1896, pg. 50 & Oct. 3, 1896, pg. 77.

Bid	Torpedo boat	Basis of Design	Displ. (Trial)	Length	Beam	Draft	Officers/ men	Armament	Price	Cost/ton
HMCo	Proposed to Secretary Mar. 27, 1896	Not stated, probably rough comparative design estimate	225 tons						Two or more at $215,000 each
HMCo	NGH Preliminary design June 26, 1896	Developed from TB-6 /7 by ratios & analyses (See Figure 6)	226 tons	196½ ft	18½ ft	5½ ft
HMCo	Bid Sept. 18, 1896	Full design developed from towing model tests, TB 6 & 7 experience. (See Figure 8)	225 tons (trial);	LOD 198 ft LWL 192 ft	On deck 18½ft	5½ ft	4 officers; 4 CPOs; 30 crew	4- 6 Pounder RFG. 2-18 in torpedo tubes; 4 torpedoes	Bid One at $218,000; Two at $209,000 each; Three at $206,000 each	$929
Bath Iron Works	TBs 9 & 10 Bid Sept. 18, 1896	English design. Drawn at BIW Drafting, Southampton, Eng. by English designers.	143.3 tons (trial); 170 tons (Full load)	147 ft	16 ft 4½ in	4 ft 7½ in	29 total	4- One Pounder RFG. 2-18 in torpedo tubes	One boat – Did not bid. Winning bid- Two at $194,000 each	$1325
Union Iron Works	TB 11 Bid Sept. 18, 1896	Based on the Thornycroft English TBD DESPERATE^[iv] [iv] Cutout from 1896 contemporary unidentified newspaper. “Our Naval Pets in Alien Hands; Fast New Torpedo Boats to be Built Under a British Expert”. Describes English design team creates BIW 30-knot TB design. Claims basis for the design is the British Torpedo Catcher PORCUPINE. See Attachment B. View All Citations	240 tons (trial); 279 tons (Full load)	210 feet	20 ft	6 ft		6- One Pounder RFG. 2-18 in torpedo tubes	Winning bid- One at $227,500	$948

Figure 5B 30-Knot TBs Machinery

Bid	Torpedo boat	Total Installed power- two shafts	Propelling Machinery weight	Boilers	Boiler pressure	Engines	Bunker Capacity	Steaming Radius
HMCo	Proposed to Secretary Mar. 27, 1896
HMCo	NGH Prelim. design June 26, 1896	5300 ihp		4-	220 psi	Four-cylinder triple expansion	60 tons	285 miles @ full speed; 2650 miles @ 10-1/2 knots
HMCo	Bid Sept. 18, 1896	5400 ihp		4- HMCo design. Total- grate surface- 228 ft²; Heating surface 10800 ft². (See Figure 9)	220 psi	Four-cylinder triple expansion 18 x 25 x 2-28 x 17	60 tons	265 miles @ full speed; 2800 miles @ 10 knots
Bath Iron Works	TBs 9 & 10 Bid Sept. 18, 1896	4200 ihp	78.20 tons (Estimated)	2- Normand Total-grate surface- 110 ft²; Heating surface 6800 ft²	230 psi	Three -cylinder triple expansion	32 tons	Limited by small bunker capacity.
Union Iron Works	TB 11 Bid Sept. 18, 1896	5600 ihp	120 tons (Estimated)	3- Thornycroft Total- grate surface- 198 ft²; Heating surface 12000 ft²	240 psi	Four-cylinder triple expansion	80 tons

The Bidders

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

Five bidders respond with proposals.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

● HMCo and Union Iron Works of San Francisco each offer a single contractor design.

● Bath Iron Works of Bath Maine and J. H. Dialogue & Sons, Camden NJ each offer two contractor designs.

[2] William duBarry Thomas. “The Genesis of a Professional Society”. SNAME Transactions. Vol.101, 1993, pgs.31-9.

● Painton Electrical Steamship & Construction Co. Alexandria, VA submits an “irregular bid” for one design.

[2] William duBarry Thomas. “The Genesis of a Professional Society”. SNAME Transactions. Vol.101, 1993, pgs.31-9.

When the bids are opened (Sept. 18, 1896), Secretary Herbert, who according to Buckingham’s letters to Converse expresses much interest in an award to Herreshoff, is in Europe. The evaluation is conducted under the direction of the Acting Secretary of the Navy, John McAdoo. He appoints a Board headed by a naval constructor and a steam engineer to investigate the proposals and “prepare data in a convenient form for the use of the Board of Bureau Chiefs”, but make no recommendations regarding the award. This is done for all thirteen torpedo boats authorized in June, but most attention is centered on the three 30-knot torpedo boats.[15]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[15] “The New Torpedo Boats” US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette, Vol. 34, Sept. 26, 1896. P. 50.

Bath Iron Works (BIW) submits two designs, a 147 tonner (the smallest design of all bids submitted) and a larger of 230 tons; the former at $194,000 each for two boats is the lowest bid received. They do not submit a bid for one boat. The designs have been created in a BIW office established in Southampton England by a team of English designers under the direction of Sir John Biles. An experienced designer of Atlantic steamship liners, and Chair of the Glasgow School of Naval Architecture, Biles previously designed the Spanish torpedo boat EL DESTRUCTOR, regarded as the forerunner of the torpedo boat destroyer (TBD). BIW also offers to guarantee 30-1/2 knots under penalty of $10,000 per knot deﬁciency.[16] [17]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[16] Idem

[1] Citation

An interesting news article of the time clipped from an unidentified newspaper “Our Naval Pets in Alien Hands”, (See Attachment B), takes issue with the design not to be a “Home Product”. The article identifies the English Torpedo Catcher PORCUPINE as the basis for the BIW TB; on examination of the designs, this is believed to be incorrect. There is a separate story that the BIW boat is based upon the French Normand CYCLONE Class; at the recommendation of Sir John Biles. While Congress requires the torpedo boats to be of domestic manufacture, using domestic materials, there is no requirement for domestic design.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

Dialogue & Sons proposes boats modelled after the latest designs by Yarrow, whose recent 190 ft, 220 ton Russian torpedo boat SOKOL, achieves 30.28 knots in official trials. But they are more expensive than BIW by about $66,000 per boat.[18]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[18] “1st Class Torpedo Boat SOKOL Built by Yarrow & Co. for Russia. Report, Contract and Specifications; 1894. Register No. 1073-A” George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 8. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

The Union Iron Works proposes a design developed from the English 30-knot (TBD) DESPERATE. It exceeds the BIW price by about $34,000, but because it will be built on the West Coast a contract award of one boat is expected. [19]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[19] “The New Torpedo Boats” US Army and Navy Journal & Gazette, Vol. 34, Sept. 26, 1896. P. 50. & Oct. 3, 1896. P. 77.

The Evolving Herreshoff Design

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

The Herreshoff design is evolving from John’s first offer of a 225 ton, 30-knot TB proposed on March 27, 1896, to the final bid submittal of Sept. 18, 1896. We have not found a March design in Capt. Nat’s design records, but on June 26, 1896, he develops a preliminary design by extension from the TB-6/7 boats they are building (Figure 6). The TB-6/7 design had been developed following Oct.1895 model testing to the equivalent of 30-knots. (See Part X of this Series for the Oct. 1895 model tests and photos of the models.)

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

Figure 6: Preliminary Calculations for a Design of 30 Knot Torpedo Boat for Bid for USN (Source Capt. Nat’s “Naval Architecture & Engineering Notes Book 3 of 5; Feb. 1895-Nov. 1899. Pg. 32” Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection. Herreshoff Marine Museum. Access courtesy Halsey C. Herreshoff.)

On August 16 and 18, Capt. Nat conducts new towing model tests of three designs for the 30-knot boat under sometimes difficult wind conditions. The models;[20]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[20] “Experiments in Towing Models for Torpedo Boats” Aug. 18, 1896.” Capt. Nat’s Naval Architecture & Engineering Notes, Book 3 of 5; Feb. 1895-Nov. 1899. Pgs. 35-37. Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection. Herreshoff Marine Museum.

● Model E at scale of 1/32 represents TBs 6 & 7. For this new test at scale 1/36 it represents a 192-1/2-foot, 228-ton vessel.

● Model G is an altered Model F of the Oct. 1895 tests- rounding the keel line and narrowing the stern. It is 229 tons.

[2] William duBarry Thomas. “The Genesis of a Professional Society”. SNAME Transactions. Vol.101, 1993, pgs.31-9.

● A new Model H (66 1/8" L x 6 3/8" B) with straight keel over ¾ of length, then running straight to a u-shaped stern. It is 230 tons.

[2] William duBarry Thomas. “The Genesis of a Professional Society”. SNAME Transactions. Vol.101, 1993, pgs.31-9.

Applying the test results to a 225-ton displacement vessel at a speed of 30.7 knots he finds Model H to have the least resistance and carves a new Half Model No. 1434, (Figure 7) and from that a new table of offsets for the hull. Model H’s reduced resistance advantage is very small, a few percentage points, but the extended length of straight keel is simpler and less expensive to construct.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

Model No. 1434: 30-Knot Torpedo Boat

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

Figure 7 Final August 1896 half model for 30-knot torpedo boat. Developed from the least resistance Towing Model H, it shows a straight keel over ¾ of length, then running straight to a u-shaped stern. Capt. Nat carved two earlier models, an undated No. 1405 possibly done at the time of John’s March 27 meeting with the Secretary of the Navy and No. 1421 carved on July 2^nd following Nat’s analysis of June 26 (See Figure 6.)

Documented Final Herreshoff Design

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

The HMCo 30-Knot TB design is identified in THE HERRESHOFF CATALOGUE RAISONNÉ as Herreshoff #189601ep [Unbuilt 30-Knot Torpedo Boat]

Surviving documents of the HMCo design submitted to the Navy include some seven drawings at MIT (general arrangements (Figure 8), boiler (Figure 9) , triple expansion engine, shell plating and body plan), draft HMCo 30-knot TB specifications (Twin-Screw TB Specification and an accompanying Machinery Specification) and draft contracts in the George Converse Collection, DeGolyer Library, SMU.[21]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[21] “Specifications twin-screw Torpedo Boat US Navy” Marked in pencil #13. 18 pages. “Specifications 30-knot Torpedo Boat”, 11 pages. George Albert Converse Papers and Photographs, 1861-1897, MSS 0068, Box 1, Folder 10. DeGolyer Library, Southern Methodist Univ.

Figure 8: General Arrangement HMCo 30-knot TB. Twin-screw, Four boilers. Armament four one-inch Rapid Fire Guns (RFG), two torpedo tubes.

HMCo Dwg 024-003(B), HH.5.01698, Sept 16, 1896. Source Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection. MIT Museum.

Figure 9: HMCo 30-knot TB Boiler. Similar power to HMCo boiler in TB 6 & 7 (See Figure 10, Part X of this Series), but simpler in design, replacing the steam extraction dome with a perforated pipe internal to the steam drum. HMCo Dwg 024-003(B) HH.5.03305, Sept. 12, 1896. Source Haffenreffer-Herreshoff Collection. MIT Museum.

Navy Evaluation of the Bids & Decision

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

Within days of opening of the bids the expectation in the press is that BIW, HMCo and the Union Iron Works will each be awarded contracts to build one 30-knot torpedo boat. The bids , if distributed one boat each, total $639,000, well within the appropriated $800,000 with adequate allowance for government armament. [22] By Oct. 3^rd doubts are raised- there is disagreement between the Chiefs of the Bureaus. Hichborn (Chief BuC&R) and Melville, Engineer- in-Chief (Chief BuSteam), are recommending the boats be awarded to the lowest bidder; BIW two boats and the West Coast Union Iron Works one, depriving HMCo of the opportunity to build any. Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance, Commodore Sampson, protests. He reasons Herreshoff deserves “a part of the contract owing to the well-known capacity of the ﬁrm for constructing ﬂeet small craft and their great success with the CUSHING which naval officers claim is one of the best boats of her size ever constructed.” (PORTER and DUPONT TBs 6 & 7, for which must is expected, are not mentioned by Sampson because they have not yet begun trials and therefore have no evidence to present.) It is prudent for the Navy to see what they can do with the 30-knot design. [23]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[22] “The New Torpedo Boats – Experts Absorbed in the Plans Offered for Their Construction” New York Times, Sept. 24, 1896. “THE NEW TORPEDO BOATS” Army and Navy Journal volume 34 September 26, 1896 page 50.

[23] “TORPEDO BOATS FOR THE NAVY”, Army and Navy Journal, Vol 34 Oct. 3, 1896, P. 77. Quote is from Oct. 3, 1896, article.

As we look back today at the significant difference between the designs in vessel size, number of boilers and bunker capacity (Figure 5) it certainly seems that building one of each (BIW, HMCo & Union Iron Works) would have been the smarter course of action.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

To accomplish Commodore Sampson’s recommendation of one boat to each contractor, the Navy needs to obtain a one boat bid from BIW. We can find no evidence of such action.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

Acting Secretary of the Navy, John McAdoo, sides with the Chiefs of BuC&R and BuSteam, but there are other “perplexing problems.” There is a question whether the smaller BIW torpedo boats will meet the requirements of service; “whether the displacement would carry proper weights for efficient service as torpedo boats.” Then the Herreshoff bid appears to be a “qualified one as to speed and may be rejected as not complying with the law.” (This we do not understand as John Brown Herreshoff was always forthcoming, writing he would accept any guarantees the Navy chose to invoke.) McAdoo decides to delay the final decision and contract awards for Secretary Herbert’s return from Europe. There is real concern a decision cannot be made before Oct. 8 as required by the appropriation law.[24]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[24] “THE TORPEDO BOAT AWARDS- Perplexing Problems That Have Delayed Their Decision” New York Times, Oct. 4, 1896.

Secretary Herbert returns from Europe on Oct. 3^rd. Having inspected the Yarrow shipyard, attended a trial of Thornycroft’s TBD DESPERATE and visited Normand's construction yard at Havre, he is well informed of their latest technology.[25] Assuming his official duties on Monday the 5^th he undertakes a lengthy hearing, “at which the several bidders or their representatives were present, and the speciﬁcations being thoroughly discussed and the contingent details gone over, the Secretary decides to award the contracts in conformity with the recommendations of Assistant Secretary McAdoo and Chief Naval Constructor Hichborn, and Engineer-in-Chief Melville.” For some reason, we do not understand, it is reported; “The Herreshoffs’ made a stiff ﬁght for two or more of the 30-knot boats, but their bid was considered by the Secretary irregular, and, therefore, not to be considered.” [26]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[25] Army Navy Journal Oct 10, 1896. P. 86.

[26] Army Navy Journal Oct. 10, 1896. P. 93.

Conclusion

[4] Thomas Wildenberg and Norman Polmar. Ship Killers: A History of the American Torpedo. (Annapolis, MD, USNI Press, 2010) pgs. 16-17.

The next day, Oct. 6, the awards for the 22-1/2 and 20-knot torpedo boats are made. Herreshoff is the only bidder to be awarded three boats, the maximum allowed by the appropriations law. (The story of these boats will be covered in Part XII of this series.) For John and Capt. Nat, it does not compensate for the 30-knot torpedo boat loss. HMCo is organized and driven to compete on performance, competition on price alone is not their game. The New York Times writes, “the (Navy) policy pursued has been to obtain boats as large as possible under the proposals and to secure as many as the appropriation of $1,300,000 would permit.” That is not what happened. For the brothers, the Navy award to BIW, for a smaller less capable design, demonstrates that even the 30-knot boats are now a price competition.

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

When a new order for three large 30-knot boats (TBs 19, 20 & 21) of 230-260 tons, similar to the English TBDs, is advertised in April 1897 HMCo does not bid, much to the “regret” of the new Assistant Secretary of the Navy Theodore Roosevelt (TR). (Appointed March 1897 by the new McKinley administration.) [27] [28] Advising Secretary of the Navy, John D. Long of his “great dissatisfaction with the torpedo boat work of the Construction Bureau” he supports the Herreshoff brothers as discussed in Part X of this series. If TR had been in office in October 1896, it is likely one 30-knot boat would have been awarded to HMCo.[29] [30]

[40] Annual Report of The Secretary of the Navy November 28, 1881. Washington GPO 1881 Pgs. 3, 5, 6.

We use cookies to allow us to better understand how the site is used. By continuing to use this site, you consent to this policy. Click to learn more

[27] “30-Knot Torpedo Boats Nos. 19, 20 & 21” Journal American Society of Naval Engineers, Vol IX 1897 pgs. 402-3; 598-9.

[28] “Theodore Roosevelt letter to NGH dated June 25, 1897.” In the letter regarding scheduling of the DUPONT (TB-7) trials TR writes, “I regret you did not make any bid for the 30-knot torpedo boats.” Correspondence Theodore Roosevelt and NGH Folder. Halsey C. Herreshoff Collection, Herreshoff Marine Museum.

[29] TR “dissatisfaction” from TR letter to John D. Long 4 Sept 1897. Morison 1:668, discussed in Facilitator, Mediator, Dabbler; Theodore Roosevelt and Technology Innovation in the U.S. Navy. Mathew Oyos (Prof History, Bradford U). pg. 132. From the single volume collection of Theodore Roosevelt’s interactions with US Navy. Forging the Trident: Theodore Roosevelt and the United States Navy (Studies in Naval History and Sea Power) by William Leeman & John B. Hattendorf (US Naval Institute Press, Annapolis MD) 2020.

[30] Part of the dissatisfaction was due to Chief Constructor Hichborn’s continuing support for the building of small 30-knot vessels while all foreign navies and other US Navy advisors including the secretariat supported TBs of 230 tons and larger. Army and Navy Journal, Vol 34 March 20, 1897 p 529; April 3, 1897 p 569; April 10, 1897 p 589.